adrock720

The Spinal Tap comment is the best, 'Why didn't you just give 10 speed greater range?' Sram: 'But it's got 11!?!?' Ok, I'm old. Not that I want to go backwards, I'm as much a tech/bike junkie as any, but when I started front rings were oval and 12-28 was max. When you grannyied out it was 28-28; 1:1. So, we are getting weaker, as so many people have posted. I always felt like they were shrinking front rings for 2 reasons: 1) To advertise lighter weight and 2) To increase ground clearance. What does 11 buy that 10 or 9 doesn't? Not much (to me), closer gear ratio yes, but overall range not a ton. The REALLY interesting thing I would like to see is what a FRAME designer could do with an extra 1" in the rear triangle, I think that will be the next revolution. This drivetrain, I think, is the gateway that will push us to the next level in the realm of pivot placement (to optimize for 1 ring as well as keep simple), as well as shorter chain stays (resulting from the lack of need to compensate design for the front mech)...